RAMESH KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two quashing applications arise from two complaint cases, which have more or less common features, and are, therefore, being disposed by this common order.

(2.) Criminal Misc. No. 6424 of 1993 relates to complaint Case No. 73 of 1993. This complaint petition was filed by Opposite Party No. 2 Bal Manohar Jalan, a resident of Patna City having his office at Hira Place, Dak Bungalow Road, Patna. Accused No. 1 in this complaint case is M/s. Verma and Co. having its office at 682, Padam Tower, 14/113, Civil Lines, Kanpur and also an office at 1, S. Verma Road, Patna. This firm is a registered broker of Uttar Pradesh Stock Exchange Association Ltd., Kanpur who has also been made an accused along with others. Petitioner Ramesh Kumar Verma is one of the partners of M/s. Verma and Co. The petitioner has not been made an accused by name, but his son Mukul Verma is accused No. 2. The complainant Bal Manohar Jalan is a businessman. He possessed 500 share scripts carrying face value of Rs. 10/- each of M/s. Himatsingka Seide Ltd., Bangalore. M/s. Bihar Abhikaran is a partnership firm having office at Hira Place, Patna, with which the complainant has good business relationship. M/s. Verma and Co. carry on business of sales and purchase of share scripts in Kanpur for and on behalf of such person or persons who engage him for dealing at rates prevailing at the time of purchase during which he makes prompt payment simultaneous with purchase and likewise receives prompt payment for the sale of the share scripts and maintains account for each such person, for whom he makes purchase or sale, and subsequently settle account with the person or persons for whom he makes sales and purchase and for the period till before settlement of account he obtains security to cover cases of shortfalls recoverable from the person or persons, for whom he acts in the deal of purchase or sale of share scripts at the exchange.

(3.) The case of the complainant is that the accused as stock broker as agent of Bihar Abhikaran had obtained from the complainant certain share scripts by way of friendly accommodation without payment, title in the same remaining with the complainant, made over the same to the agent (accused No. 1) who acted as representative, accused No. 2 in presence of the complainant with his consent on the condition that the share scripts made over to the agent would not be sold till after accounting of M/s. Bihar Abhikaran and accused No. 1.